Internet DRAFT - draft-trr-bess-bgp-srv6-args
draft-trr-bess-bgp-srv6-args
BESS Working Group K. Talaulikar
Internet-Draft K. Raza
Updates: 9252 (if approved) Cisco Systems
Intended status: Standards Track J. Rabadan
Expires: 25 March 2024 Nokia
W. Lin
Juniper Networks
22 September 2023
SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services
draft-trr-bess-bgp-srv6-args-02
Abstract
RFC9252 defines procedures and messages for SRv6-based BGP services
including L3VPN, EVPN, and Internet services. This document updates
RFC9252 and provides more detailed specifications for the signaling
and processing of SRv6 SID advertisements for BGP Service routes
associated with SRv6 Endpoint Behaviors that support arguments.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 25 March 2024.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services September 2023
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Advertisement of SRv6 SID and Arguments . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. End.DT2M Signaling for EVPN ESI Filtering . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Advertisement of Ethernet A-D per ES Route . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Advertisement of Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag
Route . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. Processing at Ingress PE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Introduction
SRv6 refers to Segment Routing instantiated on the IPv6 data plane
[RFC8402]. SRv6 Service SID refers to an SRv6 SID [RFC8402]
associated with one of the service specific SRv6 Endpoint behaviors
on the advertising Provider Edge (PE) router for Layer-3 Virtual
Private Network (L3VPN), Global Internet Routing, and Ethernet
Virtual Private Network (EVPN) services as defined in [RFC8986].
[RFC9252] defines the procedures and messages for the signaling of
BGP services including L3VPN, EVPN, and Internet services using SRv6
as data plane.
For some of the EVPN services, [RFC8986] introduced the End.DT2M SRv6
Endpoint Behavior that takes arguments (i.e., Arg.FE2). [RFC9252]
specified the encoding and procedures for signaling of the SRv6 SID
and its argument via EVPN Route Type 3 and EVPN Route Type 1
respectively. During the implementation and interoperability
testing, it was identified that the specifications in [RFC9252] were
not detailed adequately.
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services September 2023
This document updates [RFC9252] to provide the necessary details and
clarifications related to the signaling of SRv6 Service SIDs
corresponding to SRv6 Endpoint Behaviors that use arguments. While
the document refers more specifically to the signaling of the
End.DT2M SRv6 Endpoint Behavior via EVPN Route Types 1 and 3, the
procedures can be applied to the signaling of other similar endpoint
behaviors with arguments that may be signaled via BGP.
1.1. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
2. Advertisement of SRv6 SID and Arguments
As defined in [RFC8986], an SRv6 SID consists of three parts: Locator
(LOC), Function (FUNC), and Argument (ARG). SRv6 SIDs corresponding
to SRv6 Endpoint Behaviors that do not support argument do not have
the ARG part, hence all the bits after FUNC MUST be zero and have
zero argument length.
Certain SRv6 Endpoint Behaviors (e.g., End.DT2M), support arguments.
As indicated in section 3.2.1 of [RFC9252], the SRv6 SID Structure
sub-sub-TLV MUST be signaled along with SRv6 SID corresponding to
behaviors that support argument to enable the receiving router to
perform consistency checking for the argument and to perform correct
encoding of ARG value within the SRv6 SID.
While for some use cases, the SRv6 SID can be signaled as
LOC:FUNC:ARG all encoded within the SID, there are use cases where
the SRv6 SID (i.e., LOC:FUNC part) is signaled without the ARG via
one advertisement and its ARG value is signaled via another
advertisement or learnt via some other mechanism. It is the SRv6
Source Node that needs to encode the ARG after the LOC:FUNC part to
form the complete SRv6 SID (LOC:FUNC:ARG) that can be used in the
data path and encoded in either the packet's IPv6 destination address
or as a segment in the Segment Routing Header (SRH) [RFC8754], as
required.
Since arguments may be optional, the SRv6 Endpoint Node that owns the
SID indicates the SRv6 SID Structure along with the advertisement of
the LOC:FUNC part of the SRv6 SID to indicate its support for ARGs
for that specific SID. Using a zero Argument Length (AL) indicates
that the node does not accept ARG for the given SRv6 SID. Using a
non-zero AL indicates the size of the ARG that is supported by the
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services September 2023
node alongwith the Locator Block Length (LBL), Locator Node Length
(LNL), and Function Length (FL) indicating the offset at which the
node expects the ARG value to be encoded.
The advertisement of the ARG value may be done by the same node that
owns the SRv6 SID and is doing the advertisement of the LOC:FUNC
parts of that SID, or it may be done by some other node/mechanism.
The advertisement of the ARG value needs to indicate the size of the
ARG along with the value and the associated SRv6 Endpoint Behavior of
the SID. There also needs to be some mechanism to associate the
advertisement of the ARG with the SID(s) for which that ARG may be
used.
3. End.DT2M Signaling for EVPN ESI Filtering
As specified in [RFC9252], the LOC:FUNC part of the SRv6 SID with
End.DT2M behavior is signaled via EVPN Route Type 3 (Inclusive
Multicast Ethernet Tag Route) while the ESI Filtering ARG (the
Arg.FE2 notation introduced in [RFC8986]) part of the SRv6 SID is
signaled via EVPN Route Type 1 (Ethernet A-D per ES Route). The
subsections below specify the signaling and processing in more detail
as compared to [RFC9252].
ESI Filtering is a split-horizon method that is used for Multi-Homing
[RFC7432] or E-Tree procedures [RFC8317]. ESI Filtering is not used
where there is no E-Tree leaf Broadcast, Unknown Unicast, or
Multicast (BUM) traffic, no multi-homing, no split-horizon method
used, or where "local-bias" method (refer [RFC8365]) is used. In
this document we generically refer to "ESI Filtering" as the
procedure carried out by the disposition PE to avoid forwarding BUM
traffic to local Ethernet Segments or local leaf attachment circuits,
based on the presence of the ESI Filtering ARG.
The description and the examples in this section do not use the
Transposition Scheme. Hence, the Transposition Offset (TPOS-O) and
Transposition Length (TPOS-L) are both shown to be 0 and the various
MPLS label fields into which the FUNC or ARG portions may be
transposed into are also not described. The same examples could use
the Transposition Scheme. This document does not introduce any
change with respect to the use of the Transposition Scheme in the
signaling of EVPN Routes and implementations need to follow the
procedures and recommendations related to the Transposition Schemed
as specified in [RFC9252].
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services September 2023
3.1. Advertisement of Ethernet A-D per ES Route
Ethernet Auto-Discovery (A-D) per ES Routes (EVPN Route Type 1)
defined in [RFC7432] are used to achieve split-horizon filtering and
fast convergence, in case of multi-homing. A-D per ES routes are
also used to enable egress filtering of BUM traffic originated from a
Leaf, as specified in [RFC8317].
When ESI Filtering is not in use, there is no ESI Filtering ARG to be
conveyed. However, the advertisement of this route SHOULD include
the BGP Prefix-SID Attribute with an SRv6 L2 Service TLV carrying an
SRv6 Service SID with the value ::0 is carried in the SRv6 SID
Information sub-TLV with the SRv6 Endpoint Behavior set to End.DT2M.
Since the End.DT2M behavior supports the use of ARG, an SRv6 SID
Structure sub-sub-TLV MUST be included, and as no ARG value needs to
be signaled, the AL MUST be set to 0.
Following is an example representation of the BGP Prefix-SID
Attribute encoding in this case:
BGP Prefix SID Attr:
SRv6 L2 Service TLV:
SRv6 SID Information sub-TLV:
SID: ::0
Behavior: End.DT2M
SRv6 SID Structure sub-sub-TLV:
LBL: 32, LNL: 16, FL: 16, AL: 0, TPOS-L: 0, TPOS-O: 0
Figure 1: EVPN Route Type 1 without ARG for ESI Filtering
When ESI Filtering is in use, the advertisement of this route MUST
include the BGP Prefix-SID Attribute with an SRv6 L2 Service TLV
carrying the SRv6 Service SID containing the ESI Filtering ARG value
in the SRv6 SID Information sub-TLV (when not using the Transposition
Scheme) with the SRv6 Endpoint Behavior set to End.DT2M. Since the
End.DT2M behavior supports the use of ARG, an SRv6 SID Structure sub-
sub-TLV MUST be included. Also, as there is a non-zero ARG value
being signaled, the AL MUST be set to the size of the ARG and the
size SHOULD be a multiple of 8. The SRv6 SID Structure sub-sub-TLV
has the LBL, LNL, and FL set to appropriate values to indicate the
offset at which the ARG value is encoded in the 128-bit SID.
Following is an example representation of the BGP Prefix-SID
Attribute encoding in this case for a 16-bit argument value 'aaaa':
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services September 2023
BGP Prefix SID Attr:
SRv6 L2 Service TLV:
SRv6 SID Information sub-TLV:
SID: 0:0:0:0:aaaa::
Behavior: End.DT2M
SRv6 SID Structure sub-sub-TLV:
LBL: 32, LNL: 16, FL: 16, AL: 16, TPOS-L: 0, TPOS-O: 0
Figure 2: EVPN Route Type 1 with ARG for ESI Filtering
In the above examples, it would have been possible to set the LBL,
LNL, and FL values to 0 and to set the SID value as either ::0 or
aaaa::. However, such an encoding would not be backwards compatible
with [RFC9252] as described further in Section 4 and hence it is
REQUIRED that proper LBL, LNL, and FL values be set corresponding to
the supported SID Structure for the End.DT2M SRv6 Service SIDs.
3.2. Advertisement of Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag Route
Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag Route (EVPN Route Type 3) defined in
[RFC7432] is used to advertise multicast traffic reachability
information through MP-BGP to all other PEs in a given EVPN instance.
When using the SRv6 transport, the advertisement of this route MUST
include the BGP Prefix-SID Attribute with an SRv6 L2 Service TLV to
indicate the use of SRv6.
Irrespective of whether ESI Filtering is in use, an SRv6 Service SID
with the LOC:FUNC part alone is carried in the SRv6 SID Information
sub-TLV (when not using the Transposition Scheme) with the SRv6
Endpoint Behavior set to End.DT2M. Since the End.DT2M behavior
supports the use of ARG, an SRv6 SID Structure sub-sub-TLV MUST be
included. The LBL, LNL, and FL MUST be set to appropriate values to
indicate the structure of the Service SID being signaled.
When ESI Filtering is not in use, no ARG is expected to be received
by the router along with the signaled Service SID and hence the AL
MUST be set to 0.
Following is an example representation of the BGP Prefix-SID
Attribute encoding in this case:
BGP Prefix SID Attr:
SRv6 L2 Service TLV:
SRv6 SID Information sub-TLV:
SID: 2001:db8:1:fbd1::
Behavior: End.DT2M
SRv6 SID Structure sub-sub-TLV:
LBL: 32, LNL: 16, FL: 16, AL: 0, TPOS-L: 0, TPOS-O: 0
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services September 2023
Figure 3: EVPN Route Type 3 without ESI Filtering
When ESI Filtering is in use, an ARG is expected to be received by
the router along with the signaled Service SID and hence the AL MUST
be set to the size of the ARG supported by the advertising router for
the specific Service SID. The AL is unique per End.DT2M behavior
signaled by the egress PE and, therefore, the egress PE MUST use the
same AL for all the local Ethernet Segments with Attachment Circuits
in the same Broadcast Domain.
Following is an example representation of the BGP Prefix-SID
Attribute encoding in this case for a 16-bit argument:
BGP Prefix SID Attr:
SRv6 L2 Service TLV:
SRv6 SID Information sub-TLV:
SID: 2001:db8:1:fbd1::
Behavior: End.DT2M
SRv6 SID Structure sub-sub-TLV:
LBL: 32, LNL: 16, FL: 16, AL: 16, TPOS-L: 0, TPOS-O: 0
Figure 4: EVPN Route Type 3 with ESI Filtering
When ESI Filtering is in use, the advertising router MUST ensure that
the size of argument (i.e., AL) signaled in the Route Type 3 and its
corresponding Route Type 1 are equal.
3.3. Processing at Ingress PE
An ingress PE receives the LOC:FUNC parts of the SRv6 Service SID to
be used for Broadcast, Unknown Unicast, or Multicast (BUM) traffic
along with the EVPN Route Type 3 advertisements.
In the case where ESI Filtering is not used, the SRv6 Service SID to
be used is all what is received via the EVPN Route Type 3 (i.e.,
LOC:FUNC parts alone).
When ESI filtering is used, the ESI Filtering ARG of the SRv6 Service
SID is signaled along with EVPN Route Type 1 (Ethernet A-D per ES
Route). This ARG along with the LOC:FUNC parts advertised via the
EVPN Route Type 3 forms the SRv6 Service SID to be used.
Following are the processing steps to be used at the ingress PE:
1. When AL=0 is signaled via Route Type 3, then the egress PE does
not support or does not require ESI Filtering ARG for the
specific SID. The SRv6 Service SID is formed with the LOC:FUNC
parts alone and all bits after LBL+LNL+FL MUST be set to zero for
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services September 2023
encoding on the data path. In this case, the router MUST ignore
the SID value and its SID structure advertised in the
corresponding Route Type 1.
2. When a non-zero AL is signaled via Route Type 3, then the
matching Route Type 1 for the Ethernet Segment is found and
checked for the presence of an SRv6 SID advertisement with the
End.DT2M behavior.
a. If the AL=0 in the Route Type 1, then there is no usable ARG
value. In such cases, the SRv6 Service SID to be used is
formed as in (1) above.
b. If the AL values in Route Type 1 and 3 are both non-zero and
not equal, then there is no usable ARG value. It also
indicates an inconsistency in signaling from the egress PE.
To avoid looping, the BUM traffic MUST NOT be forwarded for
such routes from the specific Ethernet Segment and
implementations SHOULD log an error message.
c. The ARG value from Route Type 1 is usable only when its AL is
equal to the AL of the SID structure advertised via Route
Type 3. Once the usable ARG value is obtained, it MUST be
encoded within the rest of the SRv6 SID (LOC:FUNC parts) at
the offset of the ARG as indicated by the SID structure
(i.e., LBL+LNL+FL) in Route Type 3 and the bits after
LBL+LNL+FL+AL set to zero.
Since the LOC:FUNC and the ARG portions of the SRv6 Service SID are
signaled via different route advertisements, there can be conditions
where the ingress PE gets inconsistent ALs from the two route types.
If the ingress PE expected ESI filtering to be in use (i.e., when
forwarding BUM traffic to other PEs attached to a shared Ethernet
Segment) but does not find a usable ARG value during the above
processing, it SHOULD log a message to help with troubleshooting.
Based on the above procedures, the SRv6 Service SID encoding for the
data plane without an ESI Filtering ARG, based on the examples in
Figure 1 and Figure 3, is as follows:
Route Type 3:
SID: 2001:db8:1:fbd1::
Structure: LBL: 32, LNL: 16, FL: 16, AL: 0
SRv6 Service SID Encoded for Datapath: 2001:db8:1:fbd1::
Figure 5: SRv6 Service SID Encoding for Data Plane without ARG
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services September 2023
Based on the above procedures, the SRv6 Service SID encoding for the
data plane along with an ESI Filtering ARG, based on the examples in
Figure 2 and Figure 4, is as follows:
Route Type 1:
SID: 0:0:0:0:aaaa::
Structure: LBL: 32, LNL: 16, FL: 16, AL: 16
Route Type 3:
SID: 2001:db8:1:fbd1::
Structure: LBL: 32, LNL: 16, FL: 16, AL: 16
SRv6 Service SID Encoded for Datapath: 2001:db8:1:fbd1:aaaa::
Figure 6: SRv6 Service SID Encoding for Data Plane with ARG
Figure 7 below provides another example that illustrates the
signaling and processing of multiple bridge domains in a deployment
design.
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services September 2023
+--------------------------------+
| |
PE1 | |
+---------+ |
BUM on BD1 | +-----+ | |
+----------------> | BD1 |-------------+ |
| | +-----+ | | |
| BUM on BD2 | +-----+ | v PE3 |
| +--------------> | BD2 |-------+ +---------+
| | +-----| +-----+ | | | +-----+ |
+----+ | +---------+ v ^ | | BD1 |-----CE31
| | | | | | +-----+ |
|CE12|-----+ ESI-1 | ^ | | +-----+ |
| |-----+ | | | | | BD2 |-----CE32
+----+ | +---------+ ^ RT3 RT3 | +-----+ |
+-----| +-----+ | | dt2m dt2m +---------+
| | BD1 | | | BD2 BD1 |
| +-----+ | | FL:16 FL:32 |
| +-----+ | RT1 |
| | BD2 | | ESI-1 |
| +-----+ | AL:16 |
+---------+ |
PE2 | |
| |
| |
+-------------------------------+
Route Type 1 ESI-1:
SID: 0:0:0:0:aaaa::
Structure: LBL: 32, LNL: 16, FL: 16, AL: 16
Route Type 3 from BD1:
SID: 2001:db8:1:fbd1:fbd1:
Structure: LBL: 32, LNL: 16, FL: 32, AL: 16
Route Type 3 from BD2:
SID: 2001:db8:1:fbd1::
Structure: LBL: 32, LNL: 16, FL: 16, AL: 16
SRv6 Service SID for datapath from ingress PE1 to egress PE on BD1:
2001:db8:1:fbd1:fbd1:aaaa::
SRv6 Service SID for datapath from ingress PE1 to egress PE on BD2:
2001:db8:1:fbd1:aaaa::
Figure 7: Example with Multiple Bridge Domains
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services September 2023
4. Backward Compatibility
[RFC9252] section 6.3 specifies the use of a bitwise logical-OR
operation between the SID with ARG signaled via Route Type 1 and the
SID with LOC:FUNC parts signaled via Route Type 3 to form the SRv6
Service SID to be used in the data path. However, this assumes that
the same uniform SID structure is used and signaled for all SIDs
advertised via Route Type 3 and the Route Type 1. Such an assumption
may not always be correct and the procedures in this document remove
this restriction.
Backward compatibility with implementations doing the bitwise
logical-OR operation can be preserved by the advertisement of SIDs in
Route Type 3 and its corresponding Route Type 1 with the same SID
structure as described in Section 3.1 and Section 3.2. As an
extension, the bitwise logical-OR operation specified in [RFC9252]
cannot be used when the SID structures of the two route types are not
identical.
5. IANA Considerations
This document does not require any action from IANA.
6. Security Considerations
This document only provides a more detailed specification related to
the signaling and processing of SRv6 SID advertisements for SRv6
Endpoint Behaviors with arguments. As such, it does not introduce
any new security considerations over and above what is already
covered by [RFC9252].
7. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge Jayshree Subramanian, Sonal
Agarwal, Swadesh Agrawal, Dongling Duan, Luc Andre Burdet, Patrice
Brissette, Senthil Sathappan, Erel Ortacdag, Neil Hart, Will
Lockhart, and Vinod Prabhu for their inputs on aspects related to the
signaling of the End.DT2M SRv6 Endpoint behavior that required
clarification as also for their review of this document.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services September 2023
[RFC7432] Sajassi, A., Ed., Aggarwal, R., Bitar, N., Isaac, A.,
Uttaro, J., Drake, J., and W. Henderickx, "BGP MPLS-Based
Ethernet VPN", RFC 7432, DOI 10.17487/RFC7432, February
2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7432>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8317] Sajassi, A., Ed., Salam, S., Drake, J., Uttaro, J.,
Boutros, S., and J. Rabadan, "Ethernet-Tree (E-Tree)
Support in Ethernet VPN (EVPN) and Provider Backbone
Bridging EVPN (PBB-EVPN)", RFC 8317, DOI 10.17487/RFC8317,
January 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8317>.
[RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L.,
Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment
Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402,
July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>.
[RFC8754] Filsfils, C., Ed., Dukes, D., Ed., Previdi, S., Leddy, J.,
Matsushima, S., and D. Voyer, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header
(SRH)", RFC 8754, DOI 10.17487/RFC8754, March 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8754>.
[RFC8986] Filsfils, C., Ed., Camarillo, P., Ed., Leddy, J., Voyer,
D., Matsushima, S., and Z. Li, "Segment Routing over IPv6
(SRv6) Network Programming", RFC 8986,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8986, February 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8986>.
[RFC9252] Dawra, G., Ed., Talaulikar, K., Ed., Raszuk, R., Decraene,
B., Zhuang, S., and J. Rabadan, "BGP Overlay Services
Based on Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6)", RFC 9252,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9252, July 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9252>.
8.2. Informative References
[RFC8365] Sajassi, A., Ed., Drake, J., Ed., Bitar, N., Shekhar, R.,
Uttaro, J., and W. Henderickx, "A Network Virtualization
Overlay Solution Using Ethernet VPN (EVPN)", RFC 8365,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8365, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8365>.
Authors' Addresses
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft SRv6 Argument Signaling for BGP Services September 2023
Ketan Talaulikar
Cisco Systems
India
Email: ketant.ietf@gmail.com
Kamran Raza
Cisco Systems
Canada
Email: skraza@cisco.com
Jorge Rabadan
Nokia
United States of America
Email: jorge.rabadan@nokia.com
Wen Lin
Juniper Networks
United States of America
Email: wlin@juniper.net
Talaulikar, et al. Expires 25 March 2024 [Page 13]
